The Philadelphia Jewish Voice's Networking Central column features different groups which make a difference in our community.
This year, I have been fortunate enough to participate in the Center for Progressive Leadership's 2011 Pennsylvania Political Leaders Fellowship program. Over the coming months, I hope to share some of the lessons that I have learned, but first I would like to give you an opportunity to learn about CPL.
The Pennsylvania Political Leaders Fellowship is a nine-month, part-time leadership development program for a select group of organizational leaders, future candidates, community organizers, and progressive activists from across the state.
The CPL Fellowship Class of 2011
Each fellow has his or her own unique experience, background, passion and vision, and I appreciate the chance to get to know them and learn from them. Some want to help protect the environment, others want to end discrimination based on sexual orientation, or mentor disadvantaged youths in their community, or strength public schools, etc. CPL does not tell people what kind of progressive change to be passionate about, but it help people get it touch with their own values, hone their message and learn the political skills necessary to bring about change.
The Center for Progressive Leadership is building local, state-based leadership institutes across the country to develop diverse progressive leaders that are the networks for progressive change. Through long-term investments in targeted recruitment, training, and mentorship, CPL is building the foundation for that change with thousands of new future candidates, political staff, and organizers taking leadership roles in their communities.
My training has taken me to Philadelphia, Reading, Pittsburgh and Harrisburg. I have been forced to identify the values I stand for, relate those values to the progressive change I seek, and use effective messaging techniques to advance my values.
We are also learning fundraising skills, and I would like to pay back CPL for all I have learned by urging you to support the Center for Progressive Leadership.
Help CPL keep the program affordable to people who have a vision for change but lack the resources to make that vision a reality. CPL charges fellows a nominal $1,050 tuition for the nine-month, and even that is reduced via scholarships where appropriate. However, tuition only represents a small part of training costs, individual and group coaching, food and facilities.
CPL is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization and counts on charitable contributions to make up the difference.
For our final weekend with CPL, we are organizing a fundraiser
Saturday, September 24, 7:30 to 9:30 pm
Ethical Society, 1906 South Rittenhouse Square, Philadelphia, PA
Keynote speaker: Former Lt.-Gov. Kathleen Kennedy Townsend (D-MD)
The best part? Every donation will be matched dollar for dollar by a national donor.
JSPAN and nine other non-profit agencies joined in brief amicus curiae to the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court in the pending challenge to the "Photo ID Law" enacted in Pennsylvania earlier this year.
The case was launched by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of Viviette Applewhite and other voters who will be burdened by the new law. Applewhite, a 93 year old voter who has never driven a car, cast her first vote for President Franklin D. Roosevelt. There appears to be no record of her at the Motor Vehicle Bureau. Because she was born in another state, there is no birth certificate on file in Pennsylvania either. Before she can vote again, the Photo ID Law would require her to produce a birth certificate or other specific documentation to an office of the Motor Vehicle Bureau to convince that agency to issue her photo identification.
Applewhite and thousands of others like her face serious difficulty under the Photo ID Law. For many elderly people, the need to travel to a motor vehicle bureau and document their entitlement to a photo ID is a significant burden. For many others, securing the necessary voter ID before election day will prove to be impractical or even impossible.
The amicus curiae brief reflects extensive research on the disparate impact of the law on several hundred thousand elder voters who do not have the specific current photo identification called for in order to vote. The right to vote, the amicus brief argues, is a sacred right and is the foundation of democracy, quoting Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has stated that free and equal elections, guaranteed by the state constitution, preclude registration requirements that are so difficult as to amount to a denial of the right to vote. By requiring a registered voter who has no driver's license — or whose license has expired — to travel to a state office, provide a birth certificate or other specified documentation, and secure the specific photo ID — the law especially burdens and discriminates against the elderly.
In a document filed ahead of a hearing, Republican officials say "there have been no investigations of prosecutions of in-person voter fraud in Pennsylvania" and that fraud would be unlikely to occur if the voter ID law was not in place. This contradicts earlier positions by the state's governor. Pennsylvania State Senator Daylin Leach joins Rev. Al Sharpton with his response to the new evidence.
Yesterday, Israel's former Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, was acquitted on double billing charges as not proven:
On trial for the last two years, Olmert was accused of allegedly paying for family vacations by double billing Jewish organizations through the Rishon Tours travel agency; allegedly accepting envelopes full of cash from American businessman Morris Talansky; and allegedly granting personal favors to attorney Uri Messer when he served as trade minister in the Investment Center case. The charges were filed after he became prime minister in 2006, but covered his time as mayor of Jerusalem and later as a government minister.
According to DEBKA, "The verdict read out by Presiding Judge Moussia Arad said there was insufficient evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he accepted illegal moneys systematically and deliberately, only that he acted in an improper manner."
Pennsylvania
However, at the same time, Pennsylvania Corbett has decided to award a $249,660 contract to the Republican lobbying group, Bravo Group, to "educate" Pennsylvanians about the Commonwealth controversial, restrictive, new voter ID law. The Bravo Group is the work of Republican lobbyist Chris Bravacos who used to be the Executive Director of the Pennsylvania Republican party. Bravacos has personally donated $27,400 to the Romney campaign.
This taxpayer-funded money was intended for actual voter education, but will instead be used to create advertisements that will attempt to gloss over how many legal voters will be disenfranchised by this law. Indeed, two weeks ago Republican House Majority Leader Mike Turzai said that his Voter ID bill would "allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania."
Corbett defends the Voter ID law on the hollow pretense that it prevents voter fraud, but when Corbett was Pennsylvania Attorney General he did not pursue a single case of voter fraud.
Imagine what the conservative uproar would be if President Obama were to award a federal grant to MoveOn.org to advocate for the Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare").
Under the proposed law, concealed handgun licenses would be acceptable forms of photo ID, but student IDs would not. Many of those without IDs would have to travel great distances to get them, and some would struggle to pay for the documents they might need to obtain them. We call those poll taxes.
Isn't paying a conservative lobbyist to advocate for a Republican voter supression effort the very definition of double billing?
Sample ads pulled from the Bravo Group's vimeo channel follow the jump.
Abington Health is a not-for-profit, regional healthcare provider serving residents of Montgomery, Bucks & parts of Philadelphia counties, comprised of Abington Memorial Hospital, Lansdale Hospital, two outpatient campuses & Abington Health Physicians.
Mission: Abington Health is dedicated to improving the quality of life for all by fostering healing, easing suffering, and promoting wellness in a culture of safety, learning and respect.
Abington Health will be the most trusted health care partner, consistently exceeding expectations for care, comfort and communication."
Property tax exemption — Abington and Lower Moreland, to name just two of the townships in which it operates, have allowed the hospital to remove large parcels of land from the tax base to enlarge its operations.
Municipal services beyond those extended to others, such as vacating streets and changing traffic patterns to accommodate the hospital.
Volunteer workers without pay — community people provide untold hours of volunteer services to the hospital, greeting and helping to move and handle patients.
Abington Day — a fund raising event supported by the community every year.
Over the ninety years that this modest local hospital transformed — with these public benefits — into a large institution, the public has bestowed its gifts on the assumption that this is a non-sectarian institution.
The strength of Abington Memorial Hospital contrasts with the smaller nearby Catholic hospital, Holy Redeemer, that it now seeks to attach to its health system. Certainly no small part of the development of Abington Memorial is attributable to its appeal as a non-sectarian institution rendering community service based on medical and ethical principles, not religious dogma.
By accepting religious dogma as a limit on its medical service, Abington Health breaks a covenant with all those donors and public officials who have supported it and its non-sectarian mission.
By imposing its religious dogma on Abington health as a condition of a commercial transaction, the Church violates a key principle of American law and practice. Religions are free here to promote their beliefs and practices by virtually every means but not by coercion.
Governments — federal, state and local — are barred by the Constitution from coercing religious practice. Non-governmental enterprises including charities are barred by statute from coercing their employees to follow religious dogma. Non-governmental enterprises that accommodate the public — including hospitals — are barred by statute from discriminating against people on the basis of their religion. This includes refusal or unwillingness to participate in abortion or sterilization procedures, consistent with competent medical care.
In this case, the Catholic Church is coercing Abington Health to discriminate against all women who do not share the church dogma regarding their reproductive rights.
Seeking to add more "catchment area" to its substantial geographic influence, Abington Health is agreeing to impose this coercion on those who are caught!
(NJDC) Once again, a Republican candidate for office has condoned — and even applauded — the use of offensive Holocaust rhetoric. Pennsylvania Republican Senate candidate Tom Smith took the stage at the Blair County Tea Party FreedomFest 2012 where he praised a Tea Party speaker who he said spoke "eloquently"-despite the fact that he had just finished comparing President Barack Obama to Adolph Hitler.
'As the gentleman that was speaking before me was so eloquently saying about so many things,' Smith said prior to giving a speech regarding Obama's energy policies.
Smith is challenging Democratic Sen. Bob Casey and has been backed by several national Tea Party groups including the Tea Party Express.
[Preceding spekaer Phil] Waite started by discussing what he called the history of various economic and governmental policies, including those that he deemed socialist. He said the Obama administration is employing socialist policies, similar to those employed by the Communists in the Soviet Union and Fascists in Germany.
'I will not allow a group of Marxist, Socialist law professors, left-wing extremists to annihilate my country without a fight,' Waite said.
Waite launched into a diatribe about the Nazi Party and Hitler, saying that Obama and Hitler both wanted to centralize power and strip local governments' authority.
'All other parties were outlawed, all free elections were outlawed, 45 million dead people later, we ended that regime,' Waite said. 'Why? Because you had a slick, quick talker and someone who said 'you don't need to worry about responsibility, we'll take good care of you. Just walk the party line and smile.' And you know how that ended up.'...
The Pennsylvania Democratic Party was quick to condemn Smith and Waite.
'The speaker's comments were shocking, but it's not surprising that ... Tom Smith applauded the extremism of his fellow Tea Partier,' party spokesman Mark Nicastre said in an email. 'After all Smith is a self-proclaimed 'Tea Party guy', who founded his own local Tea Party. Throughout his campaign, Smith has embraced all of the extreme policies and extreme rhetoric of the Tea Party, and this is just the latest example of how out-of-touch Tom Smith is with middle-class Pennsylvanians.'
As we have said repeatedly, invoking the Holocaust to make a political point is never acceptable and the use of this type of language should be condemned by all. Period.
Since the state's fiscal year ends at midnight on June 30th of each year, May and June are always a busy time when everyone in Harrisburg is scrambling to put together next year's budget. We've had tough budgets for the past four years because during a recession, demand for government services goes up while revenues coming into the state coffers go down. Unlike the federal government, we are constitutionally required to balance our budget each year, so every dollar we spend must come from a revenue source.
There are really only two ways to eliminate a budget deficit: you can either cut expenditures or raise revenues. Actually, the smartest approach is to use a balanced approach that does both prudently. Unfortunately, for the past several years — due to the political realities of Harrisburg and the fact that Governor Corbett has pledged to Grover Norquist, a lobbyist who lives in Washington, DC, that he won't increase revenues in any way — the budget has been balanced exclusively through cuts.
It is important to remember that there are many areas of the state budget that can't be cut, either due to federal or state law or contractual obligations. In some cases, if we tried to cut money from a given program, we could be sued and required by a court to spend the money with interest. In other cases, our laws force additional spending. For example, Pennsylvania's criminal code creates about 2,000 new net prisoners per year (the second highest number in the nation). This requires us to build a new prison, which costs about $300 million to build and $50 million per year to operate, every single year.
All of the cuts we can make must come from a relatively small sliver of the budget that is discretionary. This includes money for first responders, education, libraries, human services, health care for our citizens, transportation improvements and our safety net for the very poor. We have continued to go back to these same areas of funding when making deeper and deeper cuts each year.
As a result, we have now reached the point at which we are in real danger of abandoning basic government services and the citizens who rely on them. You may have read about how some of our poorer schools literally would have had to close their doors if the federal courts had not intervened and ordered us to provide additional funds. Tens of thousands of people have lost their access to healthcare, childcare facilities have had to close, and libraries are either closing or drastically cutting back their hours and programs. Schools are eliminating art and music programs, guidance counselors and tutoring; and we are opening 30,000 new natural gas rigs across the state while drastically reducing the funding for environmental inspectors charged with making sure the drilling is done safely. In short, the picture is very bleak.
Following the jump below, I am going to try to give you a fuller picture of the cuts we are facing and provide you with the alternatives for which I am fighting. In my view, we could easily raise sufficient revenue to avoid most of the worst cuts without burdening a single Pennsylvania family. We could accomplish this by, among other things, enacting a reasonable tax on the Marcellus Shale extraction that is giving energy companies billions of dollars and closing the "Delaware Loophole," which allows 70% of Pennsylvania companies to avoid paying their fare share to help our state prosper.
These and other ideas will enable us to continue providing basic services to our citizens and will ensure that Pennsylvania is a state with the educational, economic and environmental quality of life that will attract businesses and families for decades to come. I hope you find this information helpful.
A list of programs funding to be restored and funding mechanisms follow the jump.
(Malvern, PA, 6/28) Democracy for America, a national political action committee with over a million members, today endorsed Dr. Manan Trivedi, Democratic candidate for Congress in Pennsylvania's 6th Congressional District. On behalf of the national organization, Montgomery County chapter president, Beverly Hahn presented Trivedi with a contribution of $2500. "Manan's distinguished record of service as a combat surgeon in Iraq, and his service to the community as a primary care physician, give him special insight into the application of military force, the consequences of foreign policy, the problems of medical care financing and insurance, and the difficulties facing small business in this troubled economy," noted Hahn. "We heartily endorse Manan, over his Republican opponent."
Former Congressman Joe Sestak, who bested Arlen Specter for the Democratic Senate nomination in 2010, was also on-hand to endorse Trivedi, and to build enthusiasm for Trivedi's campaign. Sestak, who rose to the rank of admiral in his own naval service, spoke to Trivedi's teamwork and sacrifice, voicing his support for President Obama and the entire Pennsylvania Democratic ticket.
(NJDC) Steve Smith — who the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) notes is a "longtime white supremacist" — was elected to serve on the Luzerne County, PA Republican committee. According to SPLC, Smith also has record of violence in addition to his involvement with racist and white supremacist groups:
Recruited into the neo-Nazi movement while he was stationed at Fort Bragg in the 1990s, Smith, of Pittston, Penn., has been active in an extraordinary array of white nationalist, skinhead, and neo-Nazi groups, including American Third Position, Keystone United(formerly Keystone State Skinheads), and the Council of Conservative Citizens. He is a former Aryan Nations member and former leader of the Philadelphia chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of White People, which was created by former Klan leader David Duke but is no longer associated with him. Smith also belongs to a Pennsylvania-based group called the European American Action Coalition (EAAC), which according to its website was formed in fall 2011 'by a few well known White activists in the great and historic state of Pennsylvania.'...
Smith's ties to the racist right stretch far beyond the political. In 2001, he co-founded a racist skinhead group now known as Keystone United (which was until 2009 known as the Keystone State Skinheads, or KSS), one of the largest and most active single-state racist skinhead crews in the country. In March 2003, he and two other KSS members were arrested in Scranton for beating up Antoni Williams, a black man, using stones and chunks of pavement. Smith pleaded guilty to terrorist threats and ethnic intimidation and received a 60-day sentence and probation.
To advance his goals, Smith has distanced himself somewhat from his violent past and focused on political activism. As state chairman for American Third Position (A3P), a white nationalist political party that aims to deport immigrants and return the United States to white rule, he has for several years been working the crowds at local Tea Party gatherings, which he once described as 'fertile grounds for our activists.'
In October 2010, he led a delegation of A3P activists in presenting the party's position to a Scranton Tea Party group. 'We explained that the A3P was formed to represent white Americans, who have been denied representation for decades,' he said in a press release on A3P's website. 'We provided them with a true alternative to the typical dead-end conservatism with which so many of these concerned and partially awakened Americans are involved.'
The Times Leader reported that the Luzerne County GOP was unaware of Smith's decades-long involvement with racist causes — and his criminal record — and will be meeting to discuss the situation.
Republican Congressman Joe Pitts, 72, of Pennsylvania's 16th Congressional District (Chester, Lancaster and Berks Counties), has made a blunder that is receiving international attention.
In response to a letter from a Chester County constituent on the Middle-East Pitts's office responded with a letter saying Yasser Arafat and Ariel Sharon should sit down and negotiate. Arafat died in 2004 and Sharon has been in a coma since 2006.
Det Ansinn, the Borough Council president in Doylestown, told of taking his wife's 91-year-old grandmother to a PennDot office, looking for a photo ID so she could keep her 70-year voting record intact.
Joyce Block of Doylestown Township is such a dedicated voter that Ansinn took her from the hospital in a wheelchair to vote in 2010 because she couldn't get an absentee ballot.
She has an old voter registration card with her married name, but she has never had a driver's license.
Block had all the documents on the Department of State checklist - birth certificate and Social Security card, both with her maiden name; her marriage certificate; deed to her house; Peco bills; plus her IRS refund check. That wasn't enough to satisfy PennDot, Ansinn said.
Her Hebrew marriage license was rejected because the PennDot worker couldn't read Hebrew, and the deed and Peco bill were rejected because they had her married name, not her maiden name.
The state worker suggested she take legal action to switch the ownership of her home to her maiden name, which she hasn't used in 60 years. Then, maybe, she will be allowed to vote in the November election.
"This is absurd," Block's daughter, Randee Block, said at the meeting.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania, the Advancement Project, the Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia (PILCOP), and the Washington, DC law firm of Arnold & Porter LLP filed a lawsuit today on behalf of ten Pennsylvania voters and three prominent advocacy organizations, alleging that the state's voter photo ID law violates the Pennsylvania Constitution by depriving citizens of their most fundamental constitutional right - the right to vote. The plaintiffs are asking the Commonwealth Court to issue an injunction blocking enforcement of the law before November's election. If the law is not overturned, most of the plaintiffs will be unable to cast ballots in the fall, despite the fact that many of them have voted regularly for decades.
You can see bios of the plaintiffs here. The lead plaintiff is Viviette Applewhite, shown in the video above. She is 93 and lives in Philadelphia. She had an ID card, but it was in her purse and the purse was stolen. This is her official bio:
Ms. Applewhite is an African-American woman born in 1919 in Philadelphia. Ms. Applewhite worked as a welder during World War II in the Sun Shipyard in Chester, Pennsylvania. Ms. Applewhite married and raised a daughter who for decades worked for various federal, Pennsylvania, and municipal government agencies. Now a widow, Ms. Applewhite has lived in Philadelphia for more than twenty years and enjoys five grandchildren, nine great grandchildren, and four great-great grandchildren. She has voted in nearly every election since at least 1960. Ms. Applewhite marched to support civil rights for African-Americans with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. in Macon, Georgia, and traveled on several occasions to hear him preach in Atlanta's Ebeneezer Baptist Church. Ms. Applewhite does not have and has been unable to obtain photo identification required by Pennsylvania's voter photo ID law and thus after voting at nearly every election for more than 50 years will be unable to cast a ballot this November.
Special shout out to Marian Schneider, one of the lawyers at the Advancement Project, who has been working for fair and clean elections all the years I've known her. From the Advancement Project:
The lawsuit claims that the voter photo ID law imposes a severe burden on the fundamental right to vote in violation of Article I section 5 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, which states that,
“Elections shall be free and equal; and no power, civil or military, shall at any time interfere to prevent the free exercise of the right of suffrage.”
It also alleges that the ID requirement illegally adds a new qualification for voting. Article VII section 1 of the state constitution only requires that people be 18 years of age, U.S. citizens, and residents of Pennsylvania and their voting district.
Finally, the suit claims that the voter photo ID law irrationally distinguishes between in-person and absentee voters because the latter can vote without photo ID (just writing down the last four digits of the Social Security number). Pennsylvania allows people to vote absentee only if they can demonstrate an impossibility of getting to the polls on Election Day. While in-person voter fraud is virtually nonexistent, there have been far more reports of absentee ballot fraud across the country, yet under Pennsylvania’s law this form of voting is exempt from the photo ID requirement.
Lawyers for the petitioners filed a motion for preliminary injunction with the court, asking for expedited discovery and a trial date in June in order to allow the Commonwealth Court to decide the case in sufficient time to permit the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to review the decision in advance of November’s election.
Let's all keep our fingers crossed that the law triumphs over the racism and cupidity that reigns amoungst the GOP in Harrisburg.
This week, Pennsylvania saw five interesting outcomes in the Tuesday primary. (I apologize for having taken so long to get to this....sometimes the week is just crushingly busy.) So here goes.
Starting with the top position: Mitt Romney received 464,765 votes. Barack Obama received 610,401. Obama was a scunch away from beating Mittens and Spawn combined. Full results here. While certain county results show challenges, it's early, there's time, and in the aggregate, it's good.
Next, the Senate races. Again, the Democrat, in this case Bob Casey with 80% of the primary vote, garned more votes then the top two vote getters on the Republican side. Tom Smith (who was a Democrat for 40+ years until switching sides last year) won, Sam Rohrer came in second, and Tom Corbett's pet Steve Welch came in third. The foregone conclusion is that Silent Bob will win easily in November, and he likely will. He will do so, however, without the votes of a lot of informed, progressive, line Democrats.
The AG race went to Kathleen Kane 53/47 over Patrick Murphy. This would seem surprising on its face, but she spent a lot of money on very negative ads, and money talks. If she can spend at that level for the general, she may well end up being Pennsylvania's first woman, and first Democratic, AG since elections for that position started 30 years ago. In addition to the $2.25 million her family pumped into the race, she had the support of Bill Clinton, and we'll need to see how that plays out in the general. It played in one other race, too.
In the 12th CD, Mark Critz beat Jason Altmire. Critz took John Murtha's seat after Murtha passed away, and the run-off primary of two Democrats was due to redistricting. Critz had Clinton support, as well as the well-placed Murtha machine. The money in the race was about a million on each side, with about half coming from PACs. Another major reason Critz won was due to Altmire's Blue Dog vote against the ACA: Democrats like health care.
Finally, there's the 17th, where long-term incumbent Tim Holden lost to Matt Cartwright. This is Matt's first real election. He's run as a delegate to the national convention before (and won) but he's never held elective office. He won because the redistricting process made Holden's district more Democratic, and Tim is far to the right of Matt. The Democrats of the 17th chose an actual Democrat over someone whose views could win over Republicans. NICE!
With only Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul as official opponents, Mitt Romney swept to easy victories in five primaries yesterday. Nevertheless, even with such weak opponents, in only one state, Connecticut, did he crack 2/3 of the vote, and there just barely with 67.4%. And this in the region of the country where he is best known and where he is judged by how he governed in Massachusetts rather than by what he was forced to say to placate the base on the primary campaign trail.
Newt Gingrich having focused his efforts on Delaware and only garnering 27% of the vote is said to be reconsidering his campaign although he continues to rally for support in North Carolina which votes a week from Tuesday. (See map below the jump.)
As for Ron Paul, inTrade gives him about a 3.5% chance of carrying his home state of Texas which does not vote until May 29, so he'll presumably continue his quixotic campaign until the bitter end.
Reprinted courtesy of the Jewish Social Policy Action Network
A new set of district maps for the Pennsylvania House and Senate was proposed on April 12, 2012, by the Legislative Reapportionment Commission. In response to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania's ruling in February in Holt v. LRC, the Commission proposed new maps with fewer divisions of counties and municipalities. A thirty-day period is provided for members of the public to testify at a hearing on May 2 or to file written comments with respect to the proposed maps. JSPAN and the Philadelphia Jewish Voice are members of a coalition of non-profit agencies and individuals studying the newly proposed districts. We invite your comments and suggestions.
Starting tomorrow night, the Jewish community in the United States, Israel, and throughout the world will come together to celebrate the holiday of Passover.
President and Mrs. Obama will join them, continuing their tradition of hosting a small Seder at the White House. By now, the story of how that tradition began has been told and retold, but in the spirit of Passover, I'll tell it again: In April of 2008, the President and his staff were on the trail in Pennsylvania in the midst of a long primary campaign. Weary from a long day of work and away from their families, a small group of staffers came together to hold an impromptu Seder. When then-Senator Obama got wind of the Seder, he gathered some other staff and friends and decided to join. At the end of the Seder, the President followed the traditional "Next year in Jerusalem" declaration with a pledge of his own - "Next year in the White House." Each year since, he has followed through on that promise. This year, he also added a new touch, a video message to Jews everywhere wishing them Chag Sameach as they continue their own traditions or start new ones this Passover.
The following piece is reprinted by permission from Daylin Leach's State Senate site:
Gov. Tom Corbett said he would sign a proposed law to make women getting a state-paid abortion watch a fetal ultrasound but said: “I don’t know how you make anybody watch it, OK? Because you just have to close your eyes. … But as long as it’s "on exterior, not interior,” he will approve it.
By Peter L. DeCoursey Bureau Chief Capitolwire
HARRISBURG (May 15) – The new Quinnipiac Poll says Pennsylvanians disapprove of a proposal 48-42 percent to show a fetal ultrasound to women getting state-paid abortions, but an unexpected demographic led that opposition: men.
Women are tied on the idea, 45-45 in the new Quinnipiac Polling Institute survey, but men oppose it 51-39.
Voters with a college degree opposed it 57-35, while those without a degree are essentially tied, 45 percent for it, 44 against.
The poll surveyed 1,256 registered voters and its results carry an error margin of plus or minus 2.8 percentage points.
Gov. Tom Corbett said Tuesday he continued to support the bill, and would sign it “as long as it’s not obtrusive,” and the ultrasound is done externally, over the belly, not intrusively in the vagina.
“But as long as it’s on exterior, not interior,” he will approve it, Corbett said. The bill awaiting House action, from Rep. Kathy Rapp, R-Warren, is silent about whether the mandated ultrasound would be external or trans-vaginal. A bill signed by Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell requires the mandated ultrasound to be external.
Corbett was then asked if he considered forcing women to watch it “obtrusive?” He said: “I don’t know how you make anybody watch it, OK? Because you just have to close your eyes” to avoid seeing it.
Sen. Daylin Leach, D-Montgomery, responded: “I'm going to assume he meant ‘intrusive’ instead of ‘obtrusive.’ And while I'm not a woman, I would imagine that any woman would find a tube inserted into her vagina against her will to be ‘intrusive.’ This, coupled with his admonition to women to just ‘close your eyes,’ shows a breathtaking, almost inhuman, insensitivity. I mean, oh my God.”
Reminded that Corbett said he would only sign a bill that mandated an “exterior, not interior” ultrasound, Leach responded: “Well, I'm also told he said he'd sign the Rapp bill, which, if you read it, is ‘interior.’ If he now says he veto Rapp, then that's different. But we can't let him get away with looking slightly less crazy while signing a fully crazy bill.”
Medical groups have said that interior ultrasounds are needed during the early term when many abortions are performed, to see the fetus, and asked that the Rapp bill be clarified so that like the Virginia law, it is limited to exterior ultrasounds.
The poll showed voters opposed trans-vaginal ultrasounds 64-23. Men opposed it 67-18 and women, 61-28. It also showed voters favored abortion to be legal in all or most cases, 54-37.
Tim Malloy, assistant director of the Quinnipiac Polling Institute, said they were not sure why men opposed the bill more than women.
I'm proud and pleased that Daylin is in the State Senate. I'm considering moving 2 miles so he can be MY state senator. It gives me hope that there are a few (Daylin is one of 3 I can think of offhand) people in the PA Senate who are thoughtful, conscientious and sane. Hopefully the Pennsylvania electorate will elect more of them. I feel ashamed that I pay taxes to support a gubernatorial administration that supports these ultrasounds, as well as the new Voter ID law.
The Department of Justice objected to Texas' voter ID law Monday, determining the law would discriminate against minority voters, particularly Hispanics.
"Even using the data most favorable to the state, Hispanics disproportionately lack either a driver's license or a personal identification card," Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez said in a letter to the Texas director of elections.
The same day, the Brennan Center and other legal groups moved to intervene to stop the restrictive photo ID law, which will also be reviewed in federal court. The motion, on behalf of the Texas NAACP and the Mexican American Legislative Caucus, argues the law erects unnecessary barriers to voting and disenfranchises hundreds of thousands of minority voters.
As November approaches, voter intimidation looms as a next battleground. A federal court in Philadelphia last week made clear the limits to what is allowed.
The judge upheld a long-standing consent decree prohibiting the Republican National Committee from using improper election tactics. The consent decree specifically bars the organization from using voter challengers, poll watchers, and a practice known as "vote caging" to target and intimidate voters of color.
"Under the agreement, the Republican National Committee must obtain court approval before implementing certain poll-monitoring activities in minority precincts," Reuters reports.
The court's opinion described how poll watchers and poll challengers have the potential to disenfranchise lawful voters by causing delays, crowding, and confusion inside the polling place and creating a charged partisan atmosphere that can intimidate many new voters. Here's an analysis of these past problems.
With the 2012 election fast approaching, it is important for state officials to ensure other political groups — not just the RNC — follow the law and refrain from using poll watchers to intimidate or discriminate against voters, writes the Brennan Center's Nic Riley.
Pennsylvania Update
The state Senate passed a voter ID bill, which the House is expected to vote on today. Opponents of the bill are still fighting, saying it limits a basic right. Read more here and here. Read an op-ed opposing the law from Keesha Gaskins, senior counsel at the Brennan Center.
It's not enough for the Corbett administration and its cronies in the legislature to deny suffrage to the poor, elderly and minorities. The administration, through its budget, is going to cause death and intolerable suffering amoung those least able to provide for themselves.
The numbers projected in Philly are striking: Some 4,000 mentally ill people will lose outpatient services; 400 of them will lose case management services; and 500 to 600 people with chronic mental illness will lose out on housing support, according to [Deputy Mayor for Health and Opportunity Donald] Schwarz, meaning "We expect people will be discharged from hospitals and other places into homeless shelters." Thirty to 40 young people with intellectual disabilities who would have received bridge services between youth and adult support systems will not. Sixteen percent of hospice beds for patients with HIV/AIDS will be cut: "There are folks that will die on the streets in Philadelphia because there will not be hospice placements." One out of two daytime mental health emergency teams and six out of eight walk-in centers dealing with emergency mental health services will likely be cut. And 437 addiction treatment beds will be removed, meaning more people will stay in the already strained prison system due to lack of treatment options. As for those homeless shelters — which can be expected to absorb much of this new overflow — they'll be losing critical case management services. (emphasis mine) Source
Dying on the streets. Could there be anything more shameful?
PICA is the Pennsylvania Intergovernmental Cooperation Authority. It was created two decades ago to help Philadelphia with its financial crisis, and to this day provides support and analysis. PICA has reviewed the Corbett budget and its impacts on Philadelphia. Its report is after the jump.
Last night on Al Sharpton's show, he had a segment on voting rights, which included an interview with Daylin Lynch, a terrific PA state senator. Also, a clip of Corbett, (at about 7:15) from 2010 about how Corbett wants to discourage turnout in Philadelphia. Obviously from the budget, it's not enough to deny suffrage, but he wants "those people" gone from Pennsylvania.
(JSPAN) The third Progressive Summit in Philadelphia begins Friday night with a debate between Kathleen Kane and Patrick Murphy at 6:30 pm at Arch Street United Methodist Church, 55 N. Broad St. (just north of City Hall).
On Saturday and Sunday there will be workshops and panels about critical issues progressives are working on this year, and some of the best practices in progressive organizing. Saturday evening is a night of comedy and a variety of parties. The full agenda is here. Here is a link to register for the Summit.
The Summit is a place to build relationships and network with other progressives. Start with JSPAN Board member Marc Stier who will be on two panels, Don't Stop Believing: Managing Activism Fatigue, and Building Coalitions That Win.
Great news to report from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court!
Gerrymandering declared unconstitutional in Holt v. 2011 Legislative Reapportionment Commission.
Our recent article The Legislative Reapportionment Commission Strikes Back explained Pennsylvania's flawed redistricting process. Many local leaders petitioned the Pennsylvania Supreme Court about how their communities had been diced into a number of legislative districts. The LRC countered those claims by appealing to the big picture: those splits were "necessary". Meanwhile, Amanda Holt et al and State Senator Jay Costa et al each proposed a complete redistricting map superior to the LRC's official map according to all of the relevant criteria: they split fewer communities, the districts were more compact and equal in population, etc. The LRC countered these petitions saying that they usurped the LRC's traditional authority.
Amanda Holt
In the past few citizens had the technological know how to propose redistricting maps of their own so unfair maps went unchallenged. Now private citizens like Amanda Holt can produce such maps on their personal computers. In fact, Philadelphia, Ohio, Michigan, Virginia and Arizona have held redistricting contests literally inviting their citizens to help draw the lines.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court agreed with the petitioners and rejected the LRC's gerrymander. The vote was 4-3 with Justices Castille (R), Baer (D), Todd (D) and McCaffery (D) in the majority, and Justices Saylor (R), Eakin (R) and Melvin (R) dissenting. Chief Justice Ronald D. Castille crossed party lines and joined the three democratic Associate Justices in the per curium order remanding the redistricting back to the Legislative Reapportionment Commission which will have to start over again.
AND NOW, this 25th day of January, 2012, upon consideration of the petitions for review and briefs in these legislative redistricting appeals, and after entertaining oral argument on January 23, 2012, this court finds that the final 2011 Legislative Reapportionment Plan is contrary to law. PA. CONST. art. II, Sec. 17(d). Accordingly, the final 2011 Legislative Reapportionment Plan is REMANDED to the 2011 Legislative Reapportionment Commission with a directive to reapportion the Commonwealth in a manner consistent with this Court's Opinion which will follow.
The 2001 Legislative Reapportionment Plan... shall remain in effect until a revised final 2011 Legislative Reapportionment Plan having the force of law is approved.
In the meantime, we will stick with the old districts drawn in 2001.
Is the idea that voters should choose their representatives passé?
For too long, politicians have usurped the rights of citizen's to choose their representatives, instead gerrymandering their states, effectively choosing the people who are most likely to elect them. Hopefully this decision will limit the ability of politicians to choose their constituents and put the power back where it belongs — in the hands of the people.
The new calendar for nominating petitions follows the jump.
Great news to report from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court!
Gerrymandering declared unconstitutional in Holt v. 2011 Legislative Reapportionment Commission.
Our recent article The Legislative Reapportionment Commission Strikes Back explained Pennsylvania's flawed redistricting process. Many local leaders petitioned the Pennsylvania Supreme Court about how their communities had been diced into a number of legislative districts. The LRC countered those claims by appealing to the big picture: those splits were "necessary". Meanwhile, Amanda Holt et al and State Senator Jay Costa et al each proposed a complete redistricting map superior to the LRC's official map according to all of the relevant criteria: they split fewer communities, the districts were more compact and equal in population, etc. The LRC countered these petitions saying that they usurped the LRC's traditional authority.
Amanda Holt
In the past few citizens had the technological know how to propose redistricting maps of their own so unfair maps went unchallenged. Now private citizens like Amanda Holt can produce such maps on their personal computers. In fact, Philadelphia, Ohio, Michigan, Virginia and Arizona have held redistricting contests literally inviting their citizens to help draw the lines.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court agreed with the petitioners and rejected the LRC's gerrymander. The vote was 4-3 with Justices Castille (R), Baer (D), Todd (D) and McCaffery (D) in the majority, and Justices Saylor (R), Eakin (R) and Melvin (R) dissenting. Chief Justice Ronald D. Castille crossed party lines and joined the three democratic Associate Justices in the per curium order remanding the redistricting back to the Legislative Reapportionment Commission which will have to start over again.
AND NOW, this 25th day of January, 2012, upon consideration of the petitions for review and briefs in these legislative redistricting appeals, and after entertaining oral argument on January 23, 2012, this court finds that the final 2011 Legislative Reapportionment Plan is contrary to law. PA. CONST. art. II, Sec. 17(d). Accordingly, the final 2011 Legislative Reapportionment Plan is REMANDED to the 2011 Legislative Reapportionment Commission with a directive to reapportion the Commonwealth in a manner consistent with this Court's Opinion which will follow.
The 2001 Legislative Reapportionment Plan... shall remain in effect until a revised final 2011 Legislative Reapportionment Plan having the force of law is approved.
In the meantime, we will stick with the old districts drawn in 2001.
Is the idea that voters should choose their representatives passé?
For too long, politicians have usurped the rights of citizen's to choose their representatives, instead gerrymandering their states, effectively choosing the people who are most likely to elect them. Hopefully this decision will limit the ability of politicians to choose their constituents and put the power back where it belongs — in the hands of the people.
The new calendar for nominating petitions follows the jump.
Pennsylvania's historic gerrymander is approaching a conclusion.
Let's review the story so far.
Act One: Stacking the Deck. The Census Bureau released the data for Pennsylvania from the 2010 Census on March 11, 2011, but the Legislative Reapportionment Commission on a party-line vote delayed choosing their fifth and final member until the Republican-controlled Pennsylvania Supreme Court stepped in and named Judge Stephen McEwen (R) on April 19.
Act Two: Running Out The Clock. According to a plain reading of the Pennsylvania Constitution, the LRC then had a 90-day deadline and had to prepare a preliminary plan by July 18. There would then be 60 days for "corrections" and hearings, leading to a final plan by September 17.
Any appeals to that plan would have to be filed within 30 days or by October 16. This schedule is designed to give plenty of time for potential candidates to plan before filing to run in next year's elections. However, according to the Republicans on the Legislative Reapportionment Commission, Pennsylvania does not have census data until they say that Pennsylvania has census data. The LRC's first public meeting was not until August 17, and at that time, they certified their approval of the United States Census data for Pennsylvania and declared that this would start the 90-day clock. By a stroke of the pen, the Republicans bought themselves four months of time.
Act Three: Bait and Switch. Republicans on the Committee pretend to negotiate with the Democrats in good faith, and then reveal their secret, partisan redistricting plan minutes before the LRC votes along party lines. The 2011 poster child for the abuse of voters' rights to fair elections is manifested in central Pennsylvania's 15th Senatorial district shown above. Currently, the district encompasses Harrisburg and its suburbs east of the Susquehanna River, plus a small adjacent section of York County. But in an attempt to protect an embattled incumbent Senator, the LRC created a new district that eliminates troublesome Harrisburg constituents. So instead of being contained almost entirely in a compact Dauphin County region, the new 15th district snakes through Dauphin, Cumberland, Perry, York and Adams counties creating a 150 mile horseshoe that dismantles any sense of community.
Act Five: Our Protests Fall On Deaf Ears. December 12, the LRC issues its final redistricting plan, and eleven groups of Pennsylvanians file petitions with the Pennsylvania Supreme Court challenging this map.
Now, the Legislative Reapportionment Commission has responded to the various petitions.
Some of the petitions are by mayors and other locals officials whose communities have been split, packed, cracked and otherwise gerrymandered by the proposed map. The LRC argues that such local concerns should be ignored because splits are necessary in one corner of the state in order to avoid other problems elsewhere.
However, the complaints by Amanda Holt et al and Senator Jay Costa et al take a holistic approach. They both propose complete maps which satisfying the Federal and State requirements of equal population, compact districts, etc. while avoiding splits better than does the LRC map. However, the LRC does not accept this sort of map, saying that approving a map which was not created by the LRC would "invite the public at large to usurp the Commission's responsibilities and subvert its constitutional role."
The LRC argues that their plan is no more gerrymandered than previous redistricting maps, and perhaps they are correct on this point. However, computer technology is much more widespread now than it was in 1980 or 1990 or 2000. Back then the only people who could understand the arcane world of redistricting were experts with years of training and expensive equipment, so political operatives were able to get away with a lot of mischief. Now, ordinary citizens like Amanda Holt are able to work with the same data that the LRC has been working with, and if her map is better than the LRC's map according to all of the criteria mentioned in the Voting Rights Act, the United States Constitution and the Pennsylvania Constitution, then it should be adopted in place of the flawed plan put forward by the LRC.
Oral arguments are scheduled for this Monday, January 23 in the Supreme Court Courtroom at the Capitol Building in Harrisburg.
Because of the delays imposed by the Republicans on the LRC, the Supreme Court will have little time to decide. Candidates will start circulating nominating petitions for the primaries the very next day: Tuesday, January 24. It would be very confusing to change the district lines once the primary is underway. (The nominating petitions are due on February 14.)
The question is whether the Pennsylvania Supreme Court will act like a partisan body and rubber stamp the gerrymander by a 4-3 party line vote, or whether they will stand up for the Pennsylvania Constitution and protect the voting rights of Pennsylvanians across the political spectrum.
Pennsylvania's historic gerrymander is approaching a conclusion.
Let's review the story so far.
Act One: Stacking the Deck. The Census Bureau released the data for Pennsylvania from the 2010 Census on March 11, 2011, but the Legislative Reapportionment Commission on a party-line vote delayed choosing their fifth and final member until the Republican-controlled Pennsylvania Supreme Court stepped in and named Judge Stephen McEwen (R) on April 19.
Act Two: Running Out The Clock. According to a plain reading of the Pennsylvania Constitution, the LRC then had a 90-day deadline and had to prepare a preliminary plan by July 18. There would then be 60 days for "corrections" and hearings, leading to a final plan by September 17.
Any appeals to that plan would have to be filed within 30 days or by October 16. This schedule is designed to give plenty of time for potential candidates to plan before filing to run in next year's elections. However, according to the Republicans on the Legislative Reapportionment Commission, Pennsylvania does not have census data until they say that Pennsylvania has census data. The LRC's first public meeting was not until August 17, and at that time, they certified their approval of the United States Census data for Pennsylvania and declared that this would start the 90-day clock. By a stroke of the pen, the Republicans bought themselves four months of time.
Act Three: Bait and Switch. Republicans on the Committee pretend to negotiate with the Democrats in good faith, and then reveal their secret, partisan redistricting plan minutes before the LRC votes along party lines. The 2011 poster child for the abuse of voters' rights to fair elections is manifested in central Pennsylvania's 15th Senatorial district shown above. Currently, the district encompasses Harrisburg and its suburbs east of the Susquehanna River, plus a small adjacent section of York County. But in an attempt to protect an embattled incumbent Senator, the LRC created a new district that eliminates troublesome Harrisburg constituents. So instead of being contained almost entirely in a compact Dauphin County region, the new 15th district snakes through Dauphin, Cumberland, Perry, York and Adams counties creating a 150 mile horseshoe that dismantles any sense of community.
Act Five: Our Protests Fall On Deaf Ears. December 12, the LRC issues its final redistricting plan, and eleven groups of Pennsylvanians file petitions with the Pennsylvania Supreme Court challenging this map.
Now, the Legislative Reapportionment Commission has responded to the various petitions.
Some of the petitions are by mayors and other locals officials whose communities have been split, packed, cracked and otherwise gerrymandered by the proposed map. The LRC argues that such local concerns should be ignored because splits are necessary in one corner of the state in order to avoid other problems elsewhere.
However, the complaints by Amanda Holt et al and Senator Jay Costa et al take a holistic approach. They both propose complete maps which satisfying the Federal and State requirements of equal population, compact districts, etc. while avoiding splits better than does the LRC map. However, the LRC does not accept this sort of map, saying that approving a map which was not created by the LRC would "invite the public at large to usurp the Commission's responsibilities and subvert its constitutional role."
The LRC argues that their plan is no more gerrymandered than previous redistricting maps, and perhaps they are correct on this point. However, computer technology is much more widespread now than it was in 1980 or 1990 or 2000. Back then the only people who could understand the arcane world of redistricting were experts with years of training and expensive equipment, so political operatives were able to get away with a lot of mischief. Now, ordinary citizens like Amanda Holt are able to work with the same data that the LRC has been working with, and if her map is better than the LRC's map according to all of the criteria mentioned in the Voting Rights Act, the United States Constitution and the Pennsylvania Constitution, then it should be adopted in place of the flawed plan put forward by the LRC.
Oral arguments are scheduled for this Monday, January 23 in the Supreme Court Courtroom at the Capitol Building in Harrisburg.
Because of the delays imposed by the Republicans on the LRC, the Supreme Court will have little time to decide. Candidates will start circulating nominating petitions for the primaries the very next day: Tuesday, January 24. It would be very confusing to change the district lines once the primary is underway. (The nominating petitions are due on February 14.)
The question is whether the Pennsylvania Supreme Court will act like a partisan body and rubber stamp the gerrymander by a 4-3 party line vote, or whether they will stand up for the Pennsylvania Constitution and protect the voting rights of Pennsylvanians across the political spectrum.
"Children are not like roads. They will not remain static over the next few years and they will not get the chance to redo these school years when the economy gets better."
- Debra Fuchs-Ertman, Scarborough, Maine
William Paterson's distinguished career as New Jersey's governor and senator, and subsequently as a justice on the U.S. Supreme Court, is a tad tarnished by his service as a delegate to the Constitutional Convention in 1787.
The framers of the Constitution are habitually hailed as visionaries. Not altogether true. Paterson balked at the Virginia Plan for proportional representation in Congress. He predicted that the most populous states would dominate the agenda in Congress. Proportional representation would leave New Jersey and the other small states on the margins of power.
Paterson ultimately accepted the Connecticut Compromise that affords each state equal representation in the Senate and proportional representation in the House.
With 8.7 million people, New Jersey is today America's 11th most populous state, ranking immediately above Virginia. These days it seems as if the least populous states dominate the agenda, leaving the larger states - New Jersey among them - on the margins of power. Moral of this story? New Jersey and you, congested together.
Bruce Ticker has written a new book American Vision. He has given us permission to publish this work as a weekly series. Here is the prologue.
Even on a day when almost nothing happens, the course of American history can be set for more than two centuries.
One such day was July 17, 1787. The birth of the Connecticut Compromise is customarily dated to July 16, 1787, when the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia approved a fresh but flawed legislative system, as part of a broader package of provisions for the budding Constitution.
Prior to 10 a.m. on the 17th, delegates from the most populous states to the Convention gathered at what is now Philadelphia's Independence Hall to assess the convention's vote from the day before.
The Connecticut Compromise created a split form of government: Each member of the House of Representatives would represent the same number of Americans, on a proportionate basis, and each state would be represented by the same number of senators regardless of population.
Rick Hasen predicts the case will go the Supreme Court -- and most likely be expedited ahead of the 2012 election -- making "a momentous term even more momentous."
The letter from the Department of Justice can be found on Talking Point Memo.
Meanwhile in Pennsylvania, Governor Corbett fails to provide proof of the alleged voter impersonation fraud while he continues to push for voter ID laws which will exclude many eligible Pennsylvanian from their right to vote.
B'nai B'rith welcomes the cut-off of funding from the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) to the Palestinian children's magazine Zayzafuna after a deeply disturbing story came to light that glorified Hitler. We also praise the U.S. mission to UNESCO for taking swift, strong action in its condemnation of this hateful publication, one which UNESCO should never have funded in the first place.
The Pennsylvania State House has passed the proposed congressional redistricting maps. Nearly half of the Democrats in the House voted for it. PoliticsPA has a rundown of who crossed party lines to vote for or against the maps. Keegan Gibson gives his opinion on why each rep who voted against their party's recommendations did so. It's interesting stuff.
Remember, everyone who voted yes was agreeing that the proposed 7th district (as shown to the right) was a good idea.
Let's not forget who came up with this bizarrely shaped district and who approved it.
The Philadelphia Jewish Voice is an online non-profit volunteer based community newspaper serving the Philadelphia Jewish Community since 2005. We are dedicated to addressing the important social, political and cultural issues facing our community in a spirit of honesty, integrity and diversity.
Your tax-deductible donations will help give Voice to the Greater Philadelphia Jewish Community.
To pay by credit card or paypal, click here:
or send a check to:
Eric Smolen, Treasurer,
The
Philadelphia Jewish Voice,
327 Pembroke Road,
Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004
The Philadelphia Jewish Voice is organized pursuant to
Pennsylvania's non-profit corporation law. We have tax-exempt status under IRS
Code Section 501(c)(3). Contributions are tax-deductible to the fullest extent of
the law.
For more information about the Philadelphia Jewish Voice visit
GuideStar.
Keynote speaker: Former Lt.-Gov. Kathleen Kennedy Townsend (D-MD)
Israel
Pennsylvania
— by Ken Myers, Esq.
(NJDC) Once again, a Republican candidate for office has condoned — and even applauded — the use of offensive Holocaust rhetoric. Pennsylvania Republican Senate candidate Tom Smith took the stage at the Blair County Tea Party FreedomFest 2012 where he praised a Tea Party speaker who he said spoke "eloquently"-despite the fact that he had just finished comparing President Barack Obama to Adolph Hitler.
(Malvern, PA, 6/28) Democracy for America, a national political action committee with over a million members, today endorsed Dr. Manan Trivedi, Democratic candidate for Congress in Pennsylvania's 6th Congressional District. On behalf of the national organization, Montgomery County chapter president, Beverly Hahn presented Trivedi with a contribution of $2500. "Manan's distinguished record of service as a combat surgeon in Iraq, and his service to the community as a primary care physician, give him special insight into the application of military force, the consequences of foreign policy, the problems of medical care financing and insurance, and the difficulties facing small business in this troubled economy," noted Hahn. "We heartily endorse Manan, over his Republican opponent."
(NJDC) Steve Smith — who the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) notes is a "
It also alleges that the ID requirement illegally adds a new qualification for voting. Article VII section 1 of the state constitution only requires that people be 18 years of age, U.S. citizens, and residents of Pennsylvania and their voting district.
Lawyers for the petitioners filed a motion for preliminary injunction with the court, asking for expedited discovery and a trial date in June in order to allow the Commonwealth Court to decide the case in sufficient time to permit the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to review the decision in advance of November’s election.
Newt Gingrich having focused his efforts on Delaware and only garnering 27% of the vote is said to be reconsidering his campaign although he continues to rally for support in North Carolina which votes a week from Tuesday. (See map below the jump.)
As for Ron Paul, inTrade gives him about a 3.5% chance of carrying his home state of Texas which does not vote until May 29, so he'll presumably continue his quixotic campaign until the bitter end.
Crossposted from 
Great news to report from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court!
AND NOW, this 25th day of January, 2012, upon consideration of the petitions for review and briefs in these legislative redistricting appeals, and after entertaining oral argument on January 23, 2012, this court finds that the 
From 
The Pennsylvania State House has passed the 
